Oh sure. I think Bosda’s point was that if Fox’s conservative humorists want to stake out turf of their own, rather than just looking like Jon Stewart wannabes, they’d have to be making fun of average Democrats, not just the rich and powerful ones. And that could come across as unfunny elitist bullying of the little guy.
I’d be interested in hearing him elaborate on that post, because I certainly didn’t read it that way, especially since he said:
So, are you saying that The Daily Show makes fun of average conservatives?
I’m totally missing your point. Why exactly does a conservative comedy show have to attack the average Democrat? You don’t think they could make great hay out of say, sending a correspondent to the latest Move-on or ANSWER rally, and interviewing the more colorful characters? How about a gag interview with some of the more idiotic members of Congress? The Democratic party in Congress is full of nutbars.
If they run low on material, they can start hitting the new age wackos, the radical feminists, radical environmentalists, radicals of all stripes…
Then they can go after Democratic corruption, the Hollywood left, idiots in the UN, the EU… It never ends. Hugo Chavez is a comedy gold mine.
The trick will be to avoid making the show a Limbaugh-esque bombastic attack show, and making it a more light-hearted show that pokes fun at the people who are so far out there that even Democrats go, “Okay, that guy in the Che-Guevera T-Shirt and combat boots carrying the ‘meat is murder’ sign is actually pretty nuts.”
Nope. (Did I say that?)
In order to look like something besides a mere unimaginative ripoff of liberal comedy shows, which are already attacking most of the political targets (conservative and liberal alike) that are actually, you know, funny.
But that’s just my own interpretation of the point Bosda was trying to make, and it is probably unwise to assume that I’ve interpreted it correctly.
I think you’re right. ISTM that where conservative humor has been less successful than liberal humor, it’s for two reasons: (a) not being willing to laugh at their own idiots as well as the other side’s idiots, and (b) getting so spitting mad about them dang libruls that they don’t look like they’re having fun.
I’m sorry, but as I argued before, I don’t see how Dennis Miller or Ben Stein are funny (at least in their political vein). Both come across as screechingly political and bitter ranters who sometimes remember to go back through and add some strained jokes as afterthoughts. Dennis Miller was pretty decent in his standup and SNL News days, but he was circling the drain long before 9/11 and his angry irrationality hasn’t helped matters.
The very element of “going after” a particular target for explicitly political gain, is precisely what makes it very hard to have good humor. Fox doesn’t sound like they are in this for ratings: they sound like they are in it because they really, really hate liberals and Democrats and are angry that the TDS has been a success outside of that message.
Dennis Miller is a hell of a lot less funny since his 9/11 conversion.
Dave Barry, Larry Miller, Drew Carey, and Denis Leary–those guys may be funny, but how much of their humor is political?
Ben Stein’s acting persona is funny, but when he talks about politics he couldn’t be less funny.
Penn and Teller are not, primarily, comedians. Bullshit! is great, but when Penn talks politics he gets really preachy. Not to mention that they’re extremely outspoken atheists, which makes them hard to lump in with modern conservatives.
Parker and Stone have skewered liberals plenty of times, but only in the context of skewering everybody. Their humor depends on the sort of irreverence that Fox News can’t get away with.
That leaves P.J. O’ Rourke, who I mentioned upthread as a genuinely funny conservative. But is he the Fox News sycophant type of conservative?
Really? Since she only pipes up and says something stupid a few times a year at best, that would get old fast.
Not to mention that if there’s a funny joke to be made about Barbra that isn’t “look what a crazy liberal she is!”, then The Daily Show would be there making it. Unlike Fox News, they don’t have to hold anything sacred. Is Fox going to be able to make fun of Bush, or of the religious right, or of O’Reilly or Hannity when they say something stupid? Of course not; they’d be undermining their own credibility.
Yes, but “the hard core left” is almost entirely marginalized. If The Daily Show did half an hour a night about how crazy Fred Phelps is, it would get dull fast.
I’m not saying a genuinely humorous right-leaning show can’t be made; hell, I’d probably watch if P.J. O’Rourke had a half-hour show. But if they try to make “a right-wing Daily Show”, it will flop hard.
A day late, and a dollar short, but I’ll agree that “FoxGnaws” is not elucidator’s finest hour.
That said, well, it depends on the quality of the humor, doesn’t it? If it’s simply ideological bashing, it won’t be so funny. If it actually finds the points where we liberals can be skewered, it has a chance.
Who will be the star; does anyone know?
Critics. Worlds full of fuckin’ critics. Bunch of Phyllis Steins.
Well, if that’s the way you’re gonna be, I shall now return to Earth-PrimeD-35-F23-D-16H. You’ll be sorry.
The Democrats are already watching The Daily Show do the same thing. I remember Jon having some fun with footage from a Cindy Sheehan rally a few months ago, for example.
Funny, I agree, but conservative? How do you figure? The Simpsons sometimes gets political, but I see them as more liberal than otherwise. Maybe you’re thinking about things like this episode, where Homer mentions that becoming union president will help him make life-long connections to organized crime, but I don’t see this as especially conservative.
Again, so what? Ripping off the competition seems to be what about 90% of TV is. *Survivor *was (and is) a ratings success, so all the networks got into the Reality TV busniess. Lots of the shows bombed, but some of them do quite well.
What % of the viewers does TDS get? I have to think it’s a pretty small audience, compared to what’s available to a network like Fox or even FoxNews. Maybe a lot of people get Fox, but not The Comedy Channel, or simply don’t watch the Commedy Channel. Maybe a lot of Republicans and conservatives think TDS is too slanted to the liberal side and would prefer to get their political humor elsewhere. Maybe they even plan to show it on Fox instead of FoxNews, and really tap into a big audierce.
Yeah, I’m sure that the network isn’t interested in making a profit, and just wants revenge. That makes a lot of sense.
There’s a regular segment where one of their correspondents will interview/mock some out-of-power crackpot activist, usually conservative, sometimes liberal, sometimes off the map.
Not to mention the motherfuckin’ Jane Fondas in the motherfuckin’ tree.
I like Fox Gnaws. It’s less obvious than Faux news, and captures the atavism which Fox often panders to. (Not that other networks don’t do this. I remember when MSNBC tried to top Fox’s atavism by hiring the reprehensible Mike Savage.)
Blubbering thanks from the sorely beset.
But…Mike Savage? Really? Hadn’t heard about that. Jeebus, that weeping pustule makes Anne of Green Goebbels look positively rational! How long did that loathesome experiment last? Just until he opened his upper anus?
I find it completely appropriate that Savage’s real last name is Wiener.
I don’t think they’ll draw TDS’s audience by ripping it off.
If I’m reading this chart right, TDS probably has more viewers than Fox News. The chart seems to indicate that Fox gets 1.5 million viewers a day in primetime, and that’s the Daily Show’s average viewership.
O’Reilly gets > 2M, so I don’t see any reason they can’t challenge TDS. In contrast, Olberman gets < 400k. But it needn’t even compete with TDS-- it just has to do at least as good or slightly better than whatever show it’s slated to replace on Fox.
So basically it’ll be The Colbert Report…without the sarcasm. Oh my.